Columbia’s Merit Debate Just Got Hot

Bronze seated statue before a neoclassical building with tall columns

When one of America’s top universities quietly walks back a “woke” test-optional policy, it raises fresh questions about who our higher education system really serves.

Story Snapshot

Columbia University is reversing its COVID-era test-optional policy and will again require SAT or ACT scores for admission starting with the 2027 applicants.
The move highlights deep fights over fairness, merit, and access in elite education, at a time when many Americans already feel shut out of the system.
Columbia’s own data show sky-high test scores among enrolled students, suggesting tests always mattered, even when the school claimed they were optional.
Both critics and supporters see the change as another sign that powerful institutions talk about equity while protecting their own status.

Columbia’s test policy swings and what just changed

Columbia University dropped its test requirement in 2020 during the pandemic and later declared its test-optional policy “permanent,” saying SAT and ACT results were only one piece of a “holistic and contextual” review and that students who did not submit scores were at “no disadvantage.”^[1]^[2] That language matched years of guidance from admissions coaches that Columbia would consider scores if submitted but did not require them.^[2] Now, beginning with the high school class applying for fall 2027, Columbia will again require every applicant to submit SAT or ACT scores, ending the COVID-era waiver and putting the school back in the test-required camp.

Columbia’s shift comes after it had become the last Ivy League university to remain indefinitely test-optional, according to student reporting on its earlier stance. While Columbia presented the optional policy as a way to let students “represent themselves fully,” the new requirement signals that the university once again sees standardized scores as a necessary part of its admissions file.^[1] This back-and-forth feeds public doubts about whether elite schools are following evidence, chasing rankings, or simply reacting to politics rather than serving students.

What Columbia’s numbers reveal about who gets in

Columbia’s own profile shows that the students who do get in already score near the top of the national testing scale. College Board’s BigFuture listing reports an SAT range of 1510 to 1560 and an ACT range of 34 to 36 among enrolled students, along with a tiny regular acceptance rate around 3.9 percent.^[3]^[4] Admissions guides aimed at applicants tell students they should aim for about a 1560 SAT or a 36 ACT, with a grade point average above 4.1, to be truly competitive.^[3] Independent advisors describe Columbia’s middle 50 percent test range as “elite” and warn that anything below these scores usually must be offset by an exceptional record in other areas.^[5]

Even when Columbia claimed to be permanently test-optional, national data tools still listed SAT and ACT scores as “considered if submitted,” which signaled that strong scores were a clear advantage if an applicant had them.^[4]^[5] One admissions guide put it bluntly: “While Columbia is test-optional, submitting strong SAT or ACT scores can only benefit you.”^[5] In practice, that means the students filling Columbia’s freshman classes have almost all had top-level test results, whether or not the school officially required them. For families on both the right and the left, that picture reinforces the sense that elite schools speak the language of inclusion but still filter for a narrow academic profile that favors the well-coached and well-connected.

The fairness fight: merit, money, and the feeling of a rigged game

Supporters of Columbia’s new requirement argue that standardized tests offer a common yardstick across very different high schools, which can vary widely in grading, course rigor, and resources.^[2]^[3] They see scores as one of the few tools that can cut through grade inflation and glossy résumés and help identify students with strong academic preparation, especially in a world where some schools hand out straight A’s as the norm. For these voices, dropping tests looked less like fairness and more like hiding real differences in readiness that matter once students arrive on campus.

Columbia University previously made standardized testing optional

It's now reversing course, admitting that standardized tests were actually useful for predicting student performance

Shocking!

Now that the Ivy League is back on testing, the just need to accept @CLT_Exam… https://t.co/sx3fGJcvFw

— Lauren Chen (@TheLaurenChen) June 12, 2026

Critics point out that Columbia has not released any public study proving that required test scores better predict success than grades, course rigor, and context.^[1]^[3] Under the test-optional policy, the university itself said applicants without scores were not at a disadvantage and that tests were only “one additional piece of information,” which undercuts the claim that scores are essential now.^[1]^[2] Many families already believe the admissions game favors those who can afford expensive tutors and test prep, a system that helps high-income students capture seats at elite schools while lower-income students face yet another hurdle. That frustration crosses party lines: conservatives see yet more gatekeeping by an elite club, and liberals see another barrier for working-class and minority students.

Why this single policy change matters beyond one campus

Columbia’s reversal is not just a campus policy tweak; it is part of a broader pattern where top schools swing between test-optional and test-required models without clearly showing the public what works best.^[1] Test-prep companies, admissions consultancies, and ranking systems all have money and prestige at stake, and their influence shapes how “merit” gets defined for millions of teenagers.^[2]^[5] When an institution as powerful as Columbia changes direction without sharing detailed evidence, it feeds the growing belief that the system is driven more by image management and elite self-interest than by honest measures of talent.

For Americans watching from the outside—whether they blame “woke” experiments or “America Last” elitism—the message feels similar: the rules keep changing, but the same narrow group keeps winning. Parents who work long hours, students who cannot afford private tutors, and taxpayers who fund this system see yet another example of unaccountable decision-making at the top. Columbia’s test flip will not decide the future of the American Dream, but it is a clear reminder of why so many on both the right and the left no longer trust our most powerful institutions, including the ones that claim to be gateways to opportunity.